Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8951 total)
35 online now:
DrJones*, dwise1, Faith, GDR, Theodoric (5 members, 30 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 866,999 Year: 22,035/19,786 Month: 598/1,834 Week: 98/500 Day: 56/42 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does the history of life require "macroevolution"?
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 71 days)
Posts: 1513
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(1)
Message 119 of 127 (815344)
07-19-2017 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by CRR
07-19-2017 6:21 AM


Re: 6,000 years?
How does the Bible teach 6,000 years? http://creation.com/6000-years

I don't think anyone is unaware of how the date of 6,000 years is calculated... we have all seen the numbers. So posting a link to this article hardly addresses the question posed.

First of all... the main point was that in the context of the discussion, mutations have only been accumulating since the flood, the flood reset the population structure, or at least that is the question being posed; why do you say mutations have been accumulating for 6,000 years not for only the 4,500 years since the flood.

But I see a deeper problem with your link; it is expressed in a statement from the article.

quote:
We can be confident that God’s Word is accurate in its historical details...

Well, the question is... "How can we be confident in the accuracy of the historical details?" Of course, we verify them through physical and historical evidence. And what do we find? Nope. Not very historically accurate. The dates of events don't always line up; evidence shows the age of the creation is much, much older; there is no evidence of a global flood 4,500 years ago; etc... So to claim that we can be confident in the total accuracy of the historical narrative in the Bible is not independently verified and instead relies on presumed accuracy. Those two ideas are completely different and to describe 'presumed accuracy' as 'verified accuracy' is deceptive.

The other problem is:

quote:
In fact, what we believe about God is based on historical claims, so if the history is inaccurate, then the theology must be as well!

This is a major leap in logic as well as a major presumption about the purpose of the Bible; how the content was preserved and passed down through the generations; and how it was intended to be understood by the original audiences. The Bible is a collection of stories told to describe the character of God and his relationship with mankind. I fail to see how the historical accuracy is relevant to the lessons the stories are intended to convey. One need only look to Jesus and his ministry to see this. Jesus taught primarily in parables... does the truth of what Jesus taught in parables depend on the historical accuracy of the parable? No, certainly not.

The typical response to this is that it is obvious that Jesus was speaking in parables... well it's obvious to me that there is a lot of parable-like stories in the early chapters of Genesis.

A good example is when God told Adam that if he ate of the Tree of Knowledge he would die on the very day he ate of it. But did he? Nope, he didn't die. The typical response here is that God was talking about a spiritual death, or that the process of death would begin on that day. But look up the Hebrew word used for 'death' in Gen 2:17 and then find where that word is used elsewhere in the OT. It means 'death' just like we think of death, dead, die. Nowhere else is it used to indicate 'spiritual death' or the 'beginning of the process of death'. Those are apologetic explanations for why Adam and Eve didn't actually, physically die that very day like God promised. For those that require the story to be absolutely, historically accurate, they have to make a quick switch to 'parable-like phrase' when it turns out that Adam did not actually "historically" die on the day he ate of the fruit. (BTW, I actually accept the explanation that God meant they would be separated from Him - spiritual death - on the day they ate the fruit, but, then again, I do not require that the story be historically accurate, just that it teaches a lesson about God's character and our relationship with Him.)

So in order for the Bible to be "historically accurate," it takes boat-loads of apologetics to explain away inconsistencies and seeming inaccuracies (some internal, some external). There is no amount of inaccuracy that cannot be explained away through apologetics and thus maintain the illusion of "historical accuracy." So the statement that CMI should have made is:

"What we believe about God is based on historical claims, therefore, all claims about history made in the Bible must be reconciled and explained theologically so that those historic claims maintain their alignment with our beliefs about God and the historical accuracy of the Bible."

HBD

Edited by herebedragons, : clarity

Edited by herebedragons, : No reason given.


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by CRR, posted 07-19-2017 6:21 AM CRR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by dwise1, posted 07-19-2017 10:34 AM herebedragons has responded
 Message 122 by PaulK, posted 07-19-2017 12:16 PM herebedragons has not yet responded
 Message 124 by CRR, posted 07-19-2017 6:53 PM herebedragons has not yet responded

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 71 days)
Posts: 1513
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 121 of 127 (815357)
07-19-2017 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by dwise1
07-19-2017 10:34 AM


Re: 6,000 years?
That's a good point... I don't quite agree with this statement though

IOW, those initiated into those mysteries so that they understood the true meaning of the symbols and metaphors being used.

I would put it differently. They were intended for those who were willing and able to think about spiritual truths rather than just literal, physical meanings.

A good example is in John 6 where Jesus talks about whoever eats of his flesh and drinks of his blood would have life. His followers found this a hard teaching and were like "that's just crazy, how can we eat his flesh." But Jesus was talking about a spiritual reality, and comparing what he offered to the manna in the desert. The people who grumbled were taking it literally and did not "have eyes to see and ears to hear" the spiritual message that he was teaching.

But I agree with your overall point. I have said something similar before that those who get caught up in understanding the Bible literally, miss the greater message even though they think they are preserving the spiritual message.

As an example, I work with the youth group at my church (16 years now!) and at the time we had a family attending that are hard core literalists, YEC, the whole shebang and one of their daughters was in the youth group at the time. I was doing a lesson about the exodus and basically told the whole story from Joseph to the Israelites leaving Egypt. When I got to the part where they were leaving, I said "The number given in the Bible suggests there were about 2 million people who left Egypt. Now this seems like an incredibly large number and there may be some other ways to understand these numbers, but the point is... that God brought them into Egypt as a family and he brought them out as a nation. He used their experience (a seemingly negative one) in Egypt to build them into a nation." That is the(a) main point of the story.

Well this created a significant backlash with accusations that I don't believe the Bible is true etc... which I found utterly ridiculous. They want to make a big issue over whether the specifics of a number is correct or not and so miss the big picture. I thought the lesson was very impactful and had a good message; that hard times can prepare us for something even greater than we had when we started. But instead of hearing that, they focused on the literalism. It's just ludicrous.

biblical literalism is a fool's errand in the extreme.

Again, agreed.

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by dwise1, posted 07-19-2017 10:34 AM dwise1 has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019